MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization
Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization
Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization
Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization
Journal Article

Species interactions in a successional grassland. III. Effects of canopy gaps, gopher mounds and grazing on colonization

1989
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
(1) In a perennial grassland undergoing succession after the removal of domestic grazers, three natural processes could disrupt the canopy, and thus affect colonization. These are: canopy gap formation due to the death of individual bunchgrasses; soil disturbance by gophers; and grazing by native animals. (2) Species' abilities to colonize canopy gaps and gopher mounds were assessed in the field, with seed introduction experiments, for the five most cover-dominant grass species: Anthoxanthum odoratum, Holcus lanatus, Deschampsia holciformis, Rytidosperma pilosum (all perennial bunchgrasses) and Vulpia bromoides (an annual grass). (3) The effects of native grazers on colonization by the most abundant species, Anthoxanthum, were assessed, using grazer exclosures and seed introductions in annual-dominated vegetation, where grazing activity was highest. (4) Colonization success was quantified as total leaf area, number of survivors and seed production, in sites where seeds of the colonist either fell naturally, or were introduced at natural densities. (5) The formation of canopy gaps by the death of individual bunchgrasses and soil disturbances by gophers strongly affected colonization success. The best colonizers were Anthoxanthum and Holcus, whose colonization success was increased 6-2500-fold by canopy gap formation, and 10-200-fold by the formation of gopher mounds. Few, small seedlings of Deschampsia and Rytidosperma survived in canopy gaps or on gopher mounds. Unlike Anthoxanthum and Holcus, Deschampsia and Rytidosperma did not reproduce in gaps or on mounds over a two-year period. (6) Vulpia colonists had higher seed production on mounds than the four perennials. Vulpia also colonized canopy gaps, but was excluded by perennial vegetation in the second year of growth in the gaps. (7) In annual-dominated vegetation, neither aboveground biomass nor colonization by Anthoxanthum was affected by excluding grazers. However, exclusion of grazers led to an increase in the cover of forbs after two years. Clipping aboveground vegetation allowed Rytidosperma to achieve dominance in sites where, under undisturbed conditions, it existed only as a suppressed understorey. All other perennials were negatively affected by clipping. (8) The species with the highest natural densities of seed rain also had the greatest perseed colonization success, even though negative density-dependent effects must have been strongest for those species. (9) Seed size was positively correlated with survivorship on mounds, but was unrelated to the sizes of individual colonists in gaps or on mounds. (10) Overall, canopy gaps and gopher mounds favoured the same species that colonized well in undisturbed sites. Both types of disturbance increased colonization by perennials in annual-dominated vegetation, and canopy gaps were required for changes in species dominance in perennial vegetation.*